image description

Overseas Contingency Operations

March 25, 2014 - by José Woss
Term: Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO)

Definition: OCO funding is money set aside in the federal budget for expenses connected to overseas operations such as: crisis response, infrastructure and coalition support for operations in Iraq/Afghanistan, humanitarian assistance in the Middle East and North Africa, and embassy security among other needs abroad.

Used in Sentence: “‘I have received some questions about the willingness to do OCO as a pay-for,” Fisher wrote. “Chairman Wyden is VERY OPEN to considering OCO as a pay-for. If that is the position of your organization, please include that in your support letters … [and] convey this sentiment in your meetings with senators.’ The email sheds light on the status of negotiations over a permanent “doc fix.” Lawmakers are closer than ever to repealing the SGR, but deciding how to offset the reform is proving a major challenge.

Wyden, the Finance Committee’s newly installed chief, is hardly the first lawmaker to suggest war spending as a way to fund an SGR fix. The idea has been proposed by House Democrats and has support from major players in the medical community. The Hill

History: Following the terror attacks of 2011, President George W. Bush’s administration requested Congress provide specific funds to pursue the “Global War on Terror.” Beginning in 2009 the administration of President Barack Obama changed from using the “Global War on Terror” terminology to instead employing the nomenclature of “Overseas Contingency Operations” and the funds to support the effort became known as OCO. Due to the reduced U.S. military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, the need for OCO funding is declining. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 OCO outlays/expenditures were $93 billion and the President’s request for OCO in FY 2015 has decreased to $85 billion. Currently, there is a debate in Congress about the possibility of using the OCO funds as “savings” to pay-for other expenses (i.e. SGR)—Democrats contend that reallocating OCO funds would account for actual savings, while Republicans claim that since the monies have not actually been spent it is not real savings, just money the nation no longer needs to spend.